iEibrarp  at 


OF 


^ 


(js-C'Ik  a  ^£  a^^-^/-*-/-*  c£>-i- .-!./.-( <^uL^:r^. 


THE 


Dialects  of  North  Greece 


BY 


HERBERT  WEIR  SMYTH,  Ph.  D. 

Johns  Hopkins  University. 


Read  at  the  Meeting  of  the  American  Philologicai.  Association 
HELD  at  Ithaca,  July  1886. 


Reprinted  from  The  American  Journal  of  Philology,   P'ol.  I'll,  No.  4. 


BALTIMORE 

Press  of  Isaac  Friedenwald 

1887 


ov^° 


J- 


!:^ 


6 


lie? 

MA  tN 


The  Dialects  of  North  Greece.' 


The  statement  of  Strabo  (VIII  i,  2,  p.  333)  -navni  ol   yap  eKTor 

ladfjLov  7t\t]v    Adrjvaiaiv  Koi    Meyaptau   koi   Tav   ufju  tou  Tiaiivnacroi'  Awpuap 

Kai  vvv  en  AloXels  KoKovvrai  is  a  Statement  wliich  epigraphic  testimony 
proves  to  contain  an  illegitimate  use  of  AtoXelr,  but  which  is  doubt- 
less to  be  explained  by  reference  to  that  plastic  use  of  tribal  names 
the  most  patent  case  of  which  is  the  extension  of  the  term  "EWrjves. 
By  the  Greeks  before  Aristotle  Thessaly  was  regarded  as  the 
cradle  of  the  Greek  race,  and  bore  originally,  t.  e.  before  the  incur- 
sion of  the  Thesprotians  under  Thessalus,  the  name  AloXis.  This 
incursion  gave  the  impetus  to  a  series  of  revolutions  in  tribal  rela- 
tions which  it  is  impossible  for  the  historian  to  control  with 
certainty.  The  AioXtSfwj^  n-oXi?  in  Phocis  on  the  way  from  Daulis  to 
Delphi  (Hdt.  VIII  35),  and  the  territory  of  Pleuron  and  Calydon, 
called  Alokis,  in  Southern  Aetolia,  received  in  all  probability  their 
names  from  exiled  Aeolians.  In  the  case  of  Pleuron  (nXeiipwu'a) 
such  a  conjecture  has  at  least  the  testimony  of  antiquity  in  its 
favor  (Strabo  X  3,  6,  p.  465),  and,  as  Meister  remarks,  the  state- 
ment of  a  historian  in  Steph.  Byz.,  fV  ptv  toi  Ao^pievtriv  AiVcoXot,  can 
readily  be  brought  into  agreement  with  the  assertions  of  Thuc- 
III  102,  and  the  scholion  on  Theocr.  I  56  {AloWs  yap  17  AiVcoXiV),  by 
regarding  the  Doric  Aetolians  as  the  inhabitants  of  the  apxnia 
AtVtoXt'a.  The  passage  from  Strabo  quoted  above  is  the  only 
authority  which  affixes  to  the  inhabitants  of  northwestern  and 
north-central  Greece  the  name  Aeolic.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
consentient  testimony  of  the  ancients  regarded  Thessaly  and 
Boeotia  alone  as  Aeolic,  and  the  grammarians  restrict  the  use  of 

1  Read  at  the  mjeting  of  the  American  Pliilological  Association  lield  at  Ithaca,  July,  iS86. 


10177 


the  term  "  Aeolic  dialect"  to  the  idiom  of  Lesbian  poetry,  very 
infrequently  characterizing  as  Aeolic  a  form  which  is  Boeotian  or 
Thessalian. 

Giese  (Der  aeolische  Dialekt,  p.  131)  has  well  remarked,  in  dis- 
cussing the  difficulties  presented  by  the  utterances  of  the  Greeks 
in  reference  to  their  tribal  and  dialectological  relations:  '  N'icJit 
in  den  Mcinun^en  der  Alttn  lieo^en  die  wahrhaft  historischen 
Zeugnisse,  sondern  in  ihrer  Sprache  selbst"  If  we  supplement 
this  stateinent  by  another,  which  in  reality  is  not  excluded  by  the 
first:  "  Ohne  Ri'icksicht  aiif  das  Leben  des  Volks  ist  die  Sprach- 
wissenscha/t  todt  nnd  wcriJdos'^  (Fick,  Ilias,  p.  564),  we  open  up 
the  two  avenues  by  which  the  science  of  Greek  dialectology  is  to 
be  approached.  It  will,  therefore,  in  the  first  instance  be  necessary 
to  pass  in  review  the  various  phenomena  which  constitute  each  of 
the  cantonal  idioms  of  that  w  ide  territory  reaching  from  the  Aegean 
Sea  to  the  western  part  of  Epirus,  and  from  Olympus  to  the 
southernmost  parallel  of  those  states  washed  by  the  Corinthian 
Gulf  Upon  this  scientific  basis  alone  can  we  hope  to  attain  results, 
the  value  of  which  will  doubtless  be  enhanced  by  the  fact  that  so 
comprehensive  an  investigation  has  as  yet  not  been  attempted 
in  Germany. 

To  establish  the  position  of  the  dialects  of  Thessaly  and  Boeotia 
as  dialects  of  North  Greece,  in  their  connection  with  Asiatic- Aeolic 
and  in  their  relation  to  one  another,  I  present  the  following  table 
of  their  chief  distinctive  morphological  features. 

I. — Dialect  of  Thessaly. 

A.     Peculiarities  which  belong  specifically  to  Thessaly. 

I.  f  for  «  in  fWf.  2.  or  for  u  ;  u  lias  ceased  to  exist.  3.  k  for  r  in  k\<;.  4.  ^ 
for  fl  in  0e'7).  5.  "^  for  <^  in  'ArWoir/rof.  6.  (5(5  for  &  in  IM'inv.  7.  Gen.  sing, 
-o  decl.  in  -oi.'  8.  Deinonstr.  pion  oif.  9.  Infin.  pass,  in  -aOeiv.  10.  3  pi. 
pass,  in  -vHeiv.  11.  Infin.  aor.  act.  in  -ariv.  12.  fia  for  (5f.  13.  (Joii^i/o  for 
6a(*tvr]  in  apxi<^nvxvaii)Oiii:ioac.  13.  ca  for  C  in  iiKpaviaaoev.  14.  -ev  in  3  pi.  im- 
perf.  aorist  (idoiiKas/i^d). 

15.     Points  of  agreement  witli  the  dialect  of  Hoeotia. 

I.  t  for  n  in  Oipcoq  {(kipni)^  ali.0  is  IJoeol.).  2.  £t  for  //.  3.  A  labial  for  a 
dental:  Tliess.  nfrff(z/of :rz  lioeot.  *erra?.(>c.  4,  A  dental  surd  and  aspirate 
in  Thess.rz  a  double  dental  in  V>oco\..z=.n(!  in  Attic.  See  example  under  3. 
5.  6/ for  r  ;  iyivm>(ht:<l>avyi>iv(htv'\'\\c\s.,T:aii)ivi-wi-07],iTro£laai-du  Moeoi.  6.  iftoTd^ 
for  rfmrfu;.  7.  f  =  v  in  middle  of  a  word.  8.  fiiKnog  =  jiiKpo^  (gramm  ).  9. 
yivvfini  for  yi)vnuni  from  the  analogy  of  the  -vrfii  verbs.  The  change  must  have 
takfiu  place  after  the  willuhawal  of  the  .\siatic  Acolians.     10.  Dat.  pi.  cons. 

'  In  the  Pl.arsalian  inscr.  the  gen.  ends  in  -ov. 


stems  in  -ecai  (also  Lesbian),  ir.  Inf.  in  -e/jev  (not  Pharsalian),  Lesbian 
•fcevnc  and  -ev.  I2.  Part.  perf.  Tliess.  -ovv,  Boeot.,  Lesb.  -uv.  This  is  one  of 
the  proofs  tliat  these  dialects  sprang  from  a  common  source.  13.  t'f  =  i^  before 
a  cons.  Thess.,  Boeot. ;  eag  in  B.  before  a  vowel  (Ik  in  Lesbian  before  a  cons., 
ff  before  a  vowel).  14.  kv  for  elg,  15.  Patronymics  in  -etoc,  tog.  16.  j3e?.  in 
B.  fieiXofievng^  Thess.  fi£A?^iTai;  B.  also  finA  in  /iwP.d,  Locrian  (hiTiOfini.  17. 
m)Ti  B.,  Aeolic  ~p6g,  Trpeg.  18.  Doubling  of  a  before  r,  k,  j.  ig.  Absence  of 
^iHAuaig.  20.  r  for  a  before  vowels.  21.  Absence  of  v  £(j>e?.K.  in  the  prose  in-" 
scriptions. 

C.  The  Thessalian  dialect  has  these  points  of  similarity  with  Asiatic- 
Aeolic  : 

^  I.  e  for  a  in  Oepang.  2.  i  for  e  (ei)  /JOioc.  >3.  o  for  n  in  ovrzard.  4.  v  for  o 
in  (i~t'.  5.  Assimilation  of  a  liquid  with  a  spirant,  e/iiii.  b.  ca  for  n  between 
vowels,  eaneadem.  7.  Dat.  pi  -tT.  conson.  decl.  in  -sacn.  8.  Personal  pronoun  a/i^ui, 
diiueovp;  Lesb.  d/z/ue,  d//|Ui<jv.  g.  Contract  verbs  are  treated  as  -//<  verl>s  ;  not 
in  Boeotian  inscriptions.  10.  Part.  perf.  act.  in -ow,  Lesb.  -cjv.  ii.  Part,  of 
the  substantive  verb  in  tovv -zzkuv,  Lesb.  and  Boeot.  12.  Article  oi,  a'l.  13.  la 
for  Doric  and  Ionic  fiia,  Goth,  si,  or  aeva  oIi'tj.  The  feminine  of  e)c  is  not  found 
in  any  Boeotian  literary  or  epigraphic  monument.  14.  ke  for  dr.  15.  The 
name  of  the  father  is  indicated  by  a  f)atronyniical  adjective  in  -Lor.  16.  (ilk- 
Koq  1^  fLiKoog  {gxAxam.).  17.  ^lovvvaoq  zz:.  WoWc  Zowvaog.  iS.  d/j' (the  accent  is 
uncertain)  ;  cf.  Lesbic  altv,  alv  and  Boeot.  ///,  ai.  ig.  fz^v  in  middle  of  a  word. 
20.  Absence  of  v  f^e/i/c.  in  non-Koivr/  inscriptions, 

II. — The  Dialect  of  Boeotia. 

A.  The  Boeotian  dialect  is  akin  to  that  of  Lesbos  and  Aeolis  herein: 

M.  c  for  a,  depoor,  Boeot.  also  Opdaog.  2.  BeTifni,  Aeol.  Bi^cpou  ^2-  "  for  a, 
arpoTog,^  Boeot.  also  arpardg.  4.  nopvcjTp  for  Trd/jfwi/',  Aeol.  IlopvoKtuv.  5.  v  for 
0,  oi'Vfia  (but  ciTTo).  6.  arepag  (gramm.)  7.  o  -|-  o=r  w,  8.  o-j-  a^u.  g.  Gen. 
o  decl.  in  -u.  10.  -cu  verbs  treated  as  -/n  verbs,  according  to  the  grammarians, 
and  at  least  at  the  time  of  Aristophanes  (Achar.  914).  II.  Name  of  the  father 
is  expressed  by  a  patronymic  adjective.  12.  UeiAEarpoTidag  B.,  tv^/.vi  Lesb.  for 
TtfAoae.  13,  jiiKKog  zn  fWipog  (gramm.).  14.  frrv  in  middle  of  a  word  (F  is 
also  preserved  in  B.).  15.  L,dzz.ihd.  Corinna  (J^a-.  16.  Absence  of  v  i<pE?iK. 
in  the  prose  inscriptions. 

B.  The  following  are  the  chief  peculiarities  of  the  dialect  of  Boeotia,  and 
not  found  either  in  Thessaly  or  in  Lesbos.  (Many  later  peculiarities  are  here 
included.) 

p  1,  a  for  e  in  lapog,  Thessal.  lepov,  Aeol.  Ipog  <^lepog  or  *'i(jpog.  2.  i  for  e< 
throughout.  3.  Accus.  pi.  o  decl.  in  -ug,  Aeol.  -oig,  Thessal.  -og.  4.  u  from 
compens.  length.  This  transformation  of  ovg  occurred  after  the  separation  of 
the  three  dialects.  5.  oi'  for  v,  lov  after  A,  v  and  dentals.  6.  ov  foro  in  A/ovoko- 
pi6av.  7.  01  is  written  oe,  v,  ei.  8.  r/  for  ai.  9.  7  for  (3  in  Tzpiayeleg.  10.  rr  for 
aa.     II.  77  from  err.     12.  0770,  Thessal.,  Lesbian  aTrti.     13.  ^avd  ioxjvvij.    yvvaiKi 

1  This  word  is  one  of'the  few  examples  in  which  the  relationship  of  Boeotian  and  Aeolic  is 
proven  without  the  concurrence  of  Thessalian. 


is,  however,  also  Boeot.    14.  eifiei-:=.  ifificv.    15.  Inflection  deniri ;  Lesb.,  Thess. 
UifitaToi;. 

C.  Divergences  between  Boeotian  and  Asiatic-Aeolic : 

I.  Prep,  av;  Aeol.,  Thessal.  ov  alone;  uv  is  the  only  form  in  Boeot.  and 
Doric.  2,  -k-raf>€q ;  Aeol.  TTiacvpEc,  ziavpeg.  3.  Kpdrog,  also  Thessal. ;  Aeol. 
Kpirog.  4.  Ka,  Aeol.  Kt  ;  'Ap-aui^,  Aeol.  'AfiTe^iq.  5.  ei  for  J?  throughout. 
The  solitary  example  of  ti  in  Leshic  is  nOieifiEvoc;.  6.  i  for  ei  throughout.  7. 
<j  from  compensatory  length  :  jBu/.a^  Aufu/iaxe;  accus.  pi.  <Toi'}')'pn^tf ;  fem.  part. 
0i?.uaa.  8.  ov  for  v,  lov  after  /.,  v  and  dentals.  9.  ov  for  v.  10.  oe,  r,  «  for  o<. 
II.  //  for  ai.  12.  I  before  vowels  1=  «,  ei.  13.  Gen.  pi.  -dwv,  Lesb.  -av.  14.  £f 
=  Boeot.  £^,  Lesb.  ;/.  15.  Kai-\-  i  z=  Boeot.  7,  Lesb.  a  seldom  t].  16.  Aeolic 
i/;</l(j(7/f  is  not  found  in  Boeot.  17.  Aeolic  j3ai)vr6i>r/atc.  18.  Aeolic  it(5,  Boeot. 
fl,  fW  zr:  C  ;  cf.  the  Elean  C,  which  is  Doric,  not  Aeolic.  19.  eag  for  l^.  20.  w 
verbs  inf. :  Boeot.  -//rr,  Lesb.  -r/v,  -ev.  21.  duf,  df  for  Aeol.  ftjf.  The  latter  has 
been  attributed  to  Ionic  influence.  22.  Imperative  -vWu,  Leshic  -vtcj.  The 
Boeotian  form  is,  of  course,  a  later  development.  23.  Boeot.  Tzhve,  Aeol. 
TztfiTve.     24.  Absence  of  tjii/^uaic. 

D.  The  dialect  of  Boeotia  differs  from  that  of  Thessaly  herein.  (Many 
later  peculiarities  of  B.  are  here  included.) 

I.  iapoi:  B.,  ie/tog  Thess.,  with  the  exception  of  C-  400,  25  Crannon.  2.  uv, 
Thess.  or.  3.  Thessal.  change  to  e  in  6u-,  FeKf6afiog ;  Boeot.  a.  4.  B.  a-fiorog 
and  CTparug,  Thess.  orparoc  5.  Boeot.  w,  Thess.  ov.  6.  ec  in  Boeot.  zz  i,  Thess. 
Et.  7.  ai  in  Boeot.  zz  ?/,  Thess.  ac  or  ei  in  the  ending  -rei.  8.  r  in  Boeot.  =.or, 
wr,  Tiiess.  w.  9.  o<  rr  Boeot.  oe,  v,  e;  z=  Thess.  01.  10.  t  before  vowels  rz 
Boeot.  f,  I,  cc  zz.  Thessal.  e,  t.  11.  n  -(-  o  in  Boeot.  nv,  av,  a  z-  Thessal.  a.  12.  eu 
zz.  Boeot.  10  zz.  Thess.  eo.  13.  00  nz  Boeot.  (j  zz  Thess.  00  in  -voof.  14.  Tjiess.  cct 
between  vowels  {eoeaadeiv)  =:  Boeot.  a.  15.  Thessal.  ^  for  ;i  in  iipxn^avxva- 
ipopeiaac.  16.  Thessal.  has  no  v  e<pe?.KV(T~iK6v.  17.  Thess.  gemination  of  nasals 
and  liquids.  1 8.  avg,  ovf=:  Boeot.  of,  wf  zz.  Thess.  «c.  Oi'.  19.  C=  Boeot.  rf,  <M 
zr  Thess.  C,  ff<T.  20.  aa  zzz  Boeot..  rr  zz  Thess.  T6,^£TTa?.0g,  IleT0a?.6g.  21.  \  for 
7  in  Thess.  Kig.  22.  Gen.  sing,  -o  decl.  i^  Boeot.  w,  Thessal.  ot.  23.  Boeot. 
7«<jdrw  ^  Thess.  Treiffdroi;.     24.  Boeot. 'wt  zz  Thess.  Kt'. 

III. — Points  of  Similarity  between  the  Dialects 
OF  Thessaly,  Boeotia  and  Lesbos. 

I.  f  for  a  in  Oepaog.  2.  Formation  of  patronymics.  3.  Pronunciation  of  v 
(probably).  4.  Termination  of  the  perf.  act.  part.  (-wr).  5.  I'articiple  of  the 
sul)stantive  verb  iuv.  6.  Termination  -laoi  in  consonantal  declension.  7.  f 
ill  middle  of  a  wonl  zz  r.  S.  Absence  of  i'  t<peAK.  in  the  non  Kuin/  prose  in- 
scriptions. 

I'Voiii  tlii-s  summary  it  is  clear  that  the  dialect  of  Boeotia  occu- 
pies .in  intermediate  position  between  that  of  Thessaly  and  that  of 
Lesbos,  is  nearer  akin  to  that  of  Thessaly,  and  that  the  dialect  of 


Thessaly  has  a  distinctively  Aeolic  coloring.'  Aside  from  those 
special  evolutions  in  vocalization  to  which  the  Boeotian  dialect 
first  gave  graphical  expression,  and  the  Aeolisms  of  Boeotian 
speech,  there  is  a  remainder  of  Dorisms  the  explanation  of  which 
has  offered  no  inconsiderable  difficulty  to  the  dialectologist.' 

That  the  inhabitants  of  Boeotia  and  Thessaly  were  of  the 
Aeolic  race  is  proved  by  the  close  similarity  of  their  dialects,  and 
by  the  indisputable  belief  of  the  ancients  that  the  Boeotians  were 
of  kindred  race  with  the  Aeolians.  Boeotians  joined  the  Krla-nvTc 
AtoXeif  expelled  by  the  Dorians,  in  the  emigration  to  Aeolis,  Lesbos 
and  Tenedos,  a  union  of  emigre's  scarcely  possible  had  there 
existed  no  ties  of  consanguinity  between  them. 

Two  great  tribes  occupied  Greece  north  of  the  Corinthian  Gulf 
— the  Aeolic  in  the  east,  the  Doric  chiefly  in  the  west  and  centre," 
the  Dores  themselves  being  referred  to  North  Thessaly.  From 
that  western  element  came  the  Peloponnesian  Doric  as  an  offshoot." 
now  expelling  the  idiom  of  the  original  settlers,  now  absorbing  its 
forms,  which  stand  out  as  isolated  landmarks  of  a  bygone  age 
((?.  g.  Uoolbnia  in  Sparta,  the  only  example  of  the  oi  ablaut  in  this 
name).  Though  the  Locrian  dialect  ofi'ers  certain  peculiarities, 
reappearing  in  Elean,  it  can  nevertheless  be  adjudged  to  be  a 
descendant  of  North-Doric  speech. 

Whether  a  dialectical  separation  between  Peloponnesian  and 
North-Greek  Dorians  took  place  at  the  time  of  the  return  of  the 
Heraclidae,  or  whether  they  continued  to  use  one  and  the  same 
speech,  is  a  question  admitting  merely  a  tentative  solution,  though 
the  latter  seems  the  more  probable  assumption,  since  there  exist  in 
North  Doric  a  few  remnants  which  are  parallel  to  Peloponnesian 
Doric  (gen.  in  -w  and  -ws). 

'This  is  not  the  place  to  enter  upon  a  discussion  of  CoUitz's  assertion  :  die 
thessalische  Mtindart  bildet  .  .  .  <//>  Uehergangsstufe  vom  bootisclien  zitm  lesbischejt, 
vom  leshischen  ztim  kyprisch-arkadisclien  und  vom  kyprisch-arkadisc lun  zuin 
bihtischen  Dialekte. 

-  Wilamowitz-Mollendorf  regards  the  Boeotian  idiom  as  a  mixture  of 
Achaean  and  Aeolic  elements.  Of  the  exact  nature  of  the  former  we  know 
too  little  to  permit  us  to  treat  it  as  a  basis  of  argumentation.  When  Aeolic 
and  Doric  agree  it  is  difficult  to  determine  to  which  the  phenomenon  in 
question  is  to  be  referred,  e.g.  Boeot.  gen.  in  -u. 

*The  authority  of  Herodotus  should  not  be  invoked  to  militate  against  this 
assertion,  since  it  rests  solely  on  the  supposition  of  tlie  Ionic  historian  that  the 
Dorians  alone  were  originally  pure  Hellenes.  From  this  irpuTov  fevdog  he 
concludes  that  the  Dorians  lived  in  Phthiotis,  the  seat  of  Hellen. 

■*  The  consensus  of  historical  investigation  now  relegates  the  wanderings  of 
the  Dorians  to  a  period  anterior  to  the  irruption  of  the  Boeotians. 


6 

While  the  suiiilarity  between  Thessalian  and  Boeotian  was 
rendered  more  apparent  by  the  dialectoloijical  fiyfxdiov  of  the 
inscription  from  Larissa,  their  points  of  difierence  still  await  a 
final  explanation.  Upon  the  solution  of  the  problem  whether  the 
original  inhabitants  of  Boeotia  were  of  Aeolic  or  of  Doric  blood 
depends  the  exact  position  of  its  dialect  in  its  relation  not  only  to 
that  of  Thessaly,  but  also  to  that  of  Western  and  Central  Greece,  We 
enter  here  upon  a  tortuous  path,  which  is  illuminated  solely  by  the 
occasional  rays  of  light  cast  by  ancient  literature. 

Il  has  been  asserted  by  many,  and,  for  example,  by  Merzdorf, 
that  there  existed  an  Aeolo- Doric  period.  This  favorite  assump- 
tion rests  upon  a  probability  that  is  purely  specious,  and  has 
flourished  upon  the  sterile  soil  of  reverence  for  Strabo  from  the 
time  of  Salmasius  to  the  present  day.  Its  correctness  has  never 
been  demonstrated  by  a  detailed  investigation,  nor  is  it  easily 
supportable  by  any  more  cogent  argument  than  that  in  a  both 
Aeolic  and  Doric  have  preserved  a  common  inheritance,  and  that 
they  retained  F  with  greater  tenacity  than  the  lonians.  But  these 
considerations,  together  with  some  other  minor  points  of  agree- 
ment, by  no  means  prove  the  existence  of  an  Aeolo- Doric  unity  in 
any  determinable  prehistoric  period,  much  less  elevate  such  a 
unity  to  that  degree  of  certainty  sufficient  to  serve  as  a  basis  for 
exact  dialectological  investigation.  Thoui^h  Merzdorf  accepts 
this  unity  as  an  incontrovertible  fact,  he  fails  to  show  that  the 
Boeotian  dialect,  with  its  mixture  of  Aeolic  and  Doric  forms,  stands 
in  direct  succession  to  this  primitive  Aeolo-Doric  period.' 

If,  then,  this  contingent  of  Aeolic  and  Doric  forms  cannot  be 
demonstrated  to  be  an  heirloom  of  an  Aeolo-Doric  period,  it  is 
necessary  to  take  refuge  in  the  theory  of  dialect  intermixture 
through  the  agency  of  the  influence  of  one  race  upon  another. 

The  opinion  has  prevailed  in  many  quarters  that  the  inhabitants 
of  Boeotia  were  originally  Doric,  and  that  they  were  Aeolized 
at  the  time  of  the  irruption  of  the  "Boeotians"  from  Arne  in 
Thessaly,  whence  they  were  driven  by  the  Thesprotians  under 

'Merzdorf  finds  four  characteristic  marks  of  the  Aeolo-Doric  period:  i. 
The  treatment  of  -fw  as  -lu  verbs.  2  ev  for  f/f.  3  nip  for  ntpi.  4.  Dat.  plur. 
in  -Eaai.  Tlie  incorrectness  of  all  these  assumptions  will  be  shown  later  on, 
when  we  come  to  a  discussion  of  the  intermixture  of  dialects  in  Central 
Nortli  (jreece.  Merzdorf  assumes  that  in  the  Aeolo-Doric  period  tlie  Dorians, 
who  remained  in  North  Cireece,  were  more  closely  connected  with  the  Aeolians 
than  the  I'eloponnesian  Dorians,  i.  f.  that  the  North-Doric  dialect  is  one  of 
the  bridges  which  lead  from  the  Aio/./f  to  the  A«J/<'f. 


7 

Thessahis.  Thucydides  (I  12)  says  that,  sixty  years  after  the  fall 
of  Troy,  the  Boeotians,  havino^  been  expelled  by  the  Thessalians, 
took  possession  of  the  land,  which  was  now  called  Boeotia,  but 
which  before  had  been  called  Cadmeis,  wherein  there  had  previ- 
ously dwelt  a  section  of  their  race,  which  had  contributed  their 
continy^cnt  to  the  Trojan  war.  The  latter  statement  is  evidently 
a  makeshift  to  bring  his  account  into  harmony  with  Homer, 
who  recognizes  the  Boeotians  as  inhabitants  of  Boeotia,  The 
account  of  Pausanias  varies  from  that  of  Thucydides  in  that 
he  relegates  the  immigration  of  the  Boeotians  to  a  period  ante- 
rior to  the  Trojan  war,  and  Ephorus  states  that  the  invading  force 
was  composed  of  the  Boeotians  from  Arne,  and  of  Cadmeans 
who  had  been  expelled  from  Boeotia  by  the  Thracians  and 
Pelasgians.  The  theory  of  Thucydides  that  the  Boeotians  in  their 
ingression  from  Thessaly  into  Boeotia  were  returning  to  their 
ancestral  dwelling-place  is  evidently  an  invention,  coined  in  the 
workshop  of  fiction,  and  failing  to  show  that  the  Boeotians  were  of 
Aeolic  stock.  A  similar  inversion  of  historical  fact  is  seen  in  the 
legend  that  the  Aetolians  "  returned  "  to  Elis  at  the  time  of  the 
return  of  the  Heraclidae.  The  atmosphere  which  Greek  histo- 
rians breathed  was  surcharged  with  "  returns  "  of  expatriated 
tribes. 

Though  tradition  is  adduced  pointing  to  an  invading  force  of 
Aeolic  blood,  and  though  it  has  been  assumed  that  this  force  was 
successful  in  subduing  a  Doric  race  in  Boeotia,  traces  of  whose 
language  worked  their  way  into  the  speech  of  the  conquerors,  it 
cannot  be  said  that  these  suppositions  have  either  been  made  con- 
vincing or  even  possible.  According  to  Brand,  the  latest  writer  on 
the  subject,  all  those  Dorisms  which  appear  in  the  Boeotian  dialect 
are  either  survivals  of  the  Doric  speech  of  the  conquered  inhabi- 
tants, or  are  importations  from  the  neighboring  communities  to  the 
west.  Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  plausibility  of  the  latter 
assertion,  which  will  not  be  overlooked  later  on,  the  grotesque 
ingenuousness  of  his  argument  that,  because  in  all  the  cantons  of 
Northern  Greece,  except  that  of  Thessaly,  at  the  time  of  Alexander 
the  Great,  there  obtained  a  dialect  which  presents  the  same  general 
Doric  characteristics,  therefore  such  must  have  been  the  case  in 
prehistoric  times,  needs  no  refutation.'     Inasmuch  as  all  previous 

'The  substructure  of  Brand's  theory  of  a  pan-AeoIic  dialect  is  constructed 
of  the  flimsy  materials  of  gratuitous  assumption  and  a  marvellous  readiness  to 
take  refuge  in  that  most  pliable  of  arguments — the  argiimentutn  ex  sileiilio. 


8 

treatises  on  the  dialect  of  Boeotia  have  failed  to  investigate  the 
source  of  its  dialect-mixture,  an  examination  of  this  problem  may 
not  be  without  value. 

Upon  the  arrival  of  the  expatriated  Arneans  in  Boeotia,  they 
found  there  a  mixed  population,  of  which  the  Cadmeans  and  the 
Minyae  certainly  formed  a  portion.    (The  Thebans  are  said  to  have 

taken     possession     of  their    land — a-v^iiiKrovi    rli'^pcoTroiT    e^fXdo-niTer.) 

Busolt  denies  that  the  Cadmeans  were  of  Phoenician  origin,  though 
it  is  impossible  to  tell  with  any  certainty  to  what  race  they  belonged. 
It  is,  however,  probable  that  upon  their  expulsion  they  settled  in 
Claros,  Laconia,  in  Melos  and  in  Thera.  Tradition  informs  us  that 
Erchomenos,  the  city  of  the  Minyae,  of  which  Athamas,  the  son  of 
Aeolos,  was  king,  was  connected  with  lolcos'  in  Thessaly,  an 
Aeolic  city,  called  an  fJn-ocKia  of  the  Minyae.  If  we  remember  that 
the  seats  of  the  Minyae  were  originally  on  the  Pagasaean  Gulf  and 
that  they  emigrated  thence  to  the  Copaic  valley,  we  cannot  fail  to 
see  that  Boeotia  and  Thessaly  were  originally  united  into  one 
territorial  district.' 

Athamas  was  worshipped  as  a  hero  at  AIos  in  Achaea  Phthiotis, 
having  a  chapel  connected  with  the  temple  of  Zeus  Laphystios.' 
Here  human  sacrifice  had  been  permitted — an  importation  from 
Boeotia,  where  it  had  been  introduced  by  Phoenicians.  In  Boeotia 
and  in  Phthiotis  was  an  'Adafiuvnov  TreStS*'.  Near  the  Boeotian 
Coroneia  was  a  tem[)le  dedicated  to  the  Itonian  Athena;  a  similar 
temple  near  a  town  called  Itonus  existed  in  Thessaly  ;  cf.  Grote, 
Chap.  XVIII.  The  architectural  remains  of  the  Minyae  at  Ercho- 
menos are  testimonials  of  Aeolic  genius  contemporaneous  with 
those  at  Mycenae.  The  Achaeans  were  an  aIoXikw  fdfos ;  and  the 
Dorians  did  not  develop  at  this  remote  period  any  architectonic 
greatness. 

When  the  new-comers  from  Thessaly  took  possession  of  Boeotia, 
the  Minyae  fled  to  Lemnos,  Phocaea  and  Teos,  and  thence  to 
Triphylia  in  Elis.*  Pelias  of  lolcos.  and  Neleus  of  Pylos,  which 
was  identified  with  the  Triphylian  Pylos,  were  brothers  (X  254). 
Busolt  (Griech.  Geschichte,  I  95)  finds  it  difficult  to  explain  the 
origin  of  the  settlement  of  the  Minyae  in  Triphylia,  and  character- 
izes the  Elean  dialect  as  "  related  to  the  Arcadian."   The  Arcadians, 

'Jason,  leader  of  the  .\rgonaiits  from  lolcos,  was  one  of  the  Miny.xe. 

*See  Curtiiis,  Hist.  Greece,  American  reprint,  I  100. 

'  In  Hoeolia  Zeus  Lajihystios  liad  a  temple  near  Erchomenos. 

*  Hdt.  IV  145-49.      ~<>'(i/io^  Mtvvr/tn(,  \  722. 


9 

it  is  true,  are  said  by  Strabo  to  have  been  the  earhest  inhabitants 
of  Triphylia.  But,  if  the  Minyae  were  of  Aeolic  stock,'  as  is  sup- 
posed by  Fick  (Ilias,  p.  568),  their  settlement  in  Elis  would  explain 
that  mixture  of  Aeolic  and  North  Doric  which  is  one  of  the  chief 
peculiarities  of  the  Elean  patois. 

Aetolians  setded  in  Elis,  under  the  leadership  of  Oxylus,  at  the 
time  of  the  return  of  the  Heraclidae.  If  these  Aetolians  brought 
with  them  a  dialect  not  dissimilar  to  that  of  Locris,  we  understand 
why  the  Eleans  displayed  such  a  fondness  for  a  before  p,  as  in 
Fapyov,  Trap ;  for  a  as  in  Pparpa  and  irarap,  phonetic  aberrations  found 
chiefly  in  Locris  as  regards  a,  and  in  Locris  alone  as  regards  the 
a.  Furthermore,  we  then  comprehend  such  unmistakable  traces 
of  North-Doric  influence  as  the  dative-locative  in  -01  in  the  o  decl., 
-on  dat.  pi.  cons,  decl.,  or  for  <re,  and  perhaps  -e?  accus.  pi.  (Delphic 
and  Achaean).  The  Dorisms  which  are  the  common  property  of 
all  Doric  dialects,  and  which  recur  in  this  dialect,  may  be  ascribed 
to  the  same  source,  e.  g.  r  for  o-,  w  by  comp.  length,  -izotI,  toku,  nevTc 
KciTioi,  infin.  in  -p.€v,  though  the  possibility  of  the  influence  of  Pelo- 
ponnesian  Doric  is  not  thereby  excluded.  Strabo  testifies  to  the 
admission  of  Doric  elements  into  the  Elean  dialect,  saying  Saoi  ph  olv 

fia-<TOV  TOis   Aapieva-iv   enfTrXtKOvro   KaOamp   a-vvi^r]   ruls  t€  'ApKucri    Ka\  ro'is 

'KXelois,  oItoi  MoXirTrX  BieXexdrjijav.  If  the  Minyae  who  settled  in  Tri- 
phyha  (Hdt.  IV  148)  were  Aeolic  originally  (and  we  need  not  assume 
that  they  had  been  Aeolized  at  Lemnos),  their  phonetic  contingent 
was  Aeolic,  and  we  perceive  whence  came  the  Aeolic  stratum  in 
that  remarkable  combination  of  dialectical  phenomena  known  as 
the  Elean  dialect.  I  refer  to  the  ^iXaais  (eniapov),  to  the  accus.  pi.  of 
the  a  and  o  decl.  in  -ais  and  -ois  {e.  g.  ralp,  rolp,  rhotacism  being  a  later 
development),  to  the  treatment  of  -eta  verbs  as  -pi  verbs  in  KaBaXtj- 
ptvos,  though  it  must  be  conceded  that  this  too  is  a  peculiarity  of 
the  Locrian  dialect.  This  theory  of  the  origin  of  the  intermixture 
of  dialects  in  Elis  (first  suggested  by  Fick),  though  new,  and  per- 
haps destined  to  excite  the  hostility  of  surprise,  cannot  be  dis- 
missed without  an  examination  of  all  the  arguments  that  make  for 
this  conclusion.^ 

•The  Asiatic  Aeolians  were  then  composed  of  two  contingents:  (i)  The 
expelled  Thessalians  and  Minyae,  who  joined  the  {2)  Peloponnesian  Aeolians, 
who  reached  their  destination  via  Boeotia.  The  argument  that  the  Minyae  were 
lonians  who  brought  «  (instead  of  £f  cum  genet.),  fk",  etc.,  to  the  Aeolic  dialect, 
is  a  mere  supposition,  Duncker  (V^  24),  it  is  true,  regards  as  lonians  those 
expelled  by  the  Arneans. 

■2  Blass  lays  weight   upon   the  fact  that  Pisatis  was  connected  with  Arcadia 


10 

This  digression  was  necessitated  by  my  desire  to  develop  and 
confirm  the  supposition  that,  of  the  original  inhabitants  of  Boeotia, 
the  Minyae  at  least  were  of  Aeolic  stock.'  The  name  of  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  land  drained  by  the  Cephissus  was  in  historical  times 
inter  alia  AloXds  BokotoI.  Now,  the  peculiarity  of  this  denomina- 
tion of  a  people  which  formed  later  on  a  federal  unity,  leads  to  the 
not  unplausible  supposition  that  herein  we  have  a  designation  of 
two  tribal  entities — the  Aeolians  and  the  Boeotians ;  otherwise,  it 
would  be  difficult  to  explain  a  compound  name  of  this  character 
not  easily  paralleled  in  the  domain  of  Greek  ethnography  or  else- 
where in  Greek,  but  occurring  in  at  least  one  cognate  language. 
If  in  reality  the  tribe  called  Boiaroi  was  a  part  of  that  body  of 
Dorian  Greeks  who,  as  pioneers  of  a  Dorian  civilization,  left  their 
western  home  to  seek  a  new  habitation  in  the  east,  the  possibility 
of  a  solution  of  the  problem  of  dialect-mixture  in  Boeotia  becomes 
at  once  apparent.  The  Boeotians  left  Arne  in  Thessaly  either 
before  or  after  the  Trojan  war — our  authorities  varying  between 
the  one  date  and  the  other — but  that  they  were  necessarily  Aeolians 
is  far  from  being  proved  by  the  sporadic  testimony  of  tradition. 
Pausanias,  X    8,  4,    couches   his   opinion  in   positive   language: 

Q((T(Ta\iav  yap  Knl  ovroi  {ol  Botcorot)  ra  apxniortpa  coKi]anv   Koi  AlnXus  tt}vi- 

Kavra  f/caXoOj/To,  but  we  have  no  warrant  for  the  credibility  of  his 
source  of  information.  Thucydides  doubtless  believed  them  to  be 
Aeolians,  since  they  were  "  returning  "  to  Boeotia,  which  was  an 
Aeolic  country  in  his  opinion.  A  dispossessed  Aeolic  people 
would  naturally  take  refuge  with  a  kindred  race,  but  their  arrival 
is  signalized  not  by  a  fraternal  welcome,  but  by  the  expulsion  of 
the  Minyae,  once  the  most  powerful  tribe  of  North  Greece.  If  it  be 
granted  that  the  Arneans  were  Aeolians — and  we  must  confess  that 
the  balance  of  probability  according  to  tradition  inclines  to  this 
view — we  are  driven  to  the  conclusion  that  at  this  turbulent  period, 
when  the  Dores  themselves  were  compelled  to  vacate  their  settle- 
ments, a  body  of  Dorians  must  have  forced  their  way  across  the 
confines  of  Boeotia  and  become  amalgamated  with  the  remnant  of 

before  its  conquest  by  the  Eleans  in  the  fifth  century.  But  from  Arcadia  the 
Elean  dialect  could  have  derived  but  few  Aeolic  ingredients.  The  general 
features  of  the  Arcadian  dialect  are  widely  different  from  those  of  Elis  ; — 
thus — i^  for  o  in  arrii,  a?./.v  ;  tar  for  fc  ;  '"  for  *i' ;  TrOf  for  ~p<5f ;  termination  -vai, 
iccus.  pi.  -TOf,  ft,  av,  Tjvai,  -fevat,  change  of  t  io  n. 

'  McvuciTTux:  (lEVf/aTToc)  Be'/^i,  UtvOevc  have  been  regarded  as  survivals  of 
the  original  Aeolic,  a  proof  of  the  long  life  of  proper  names,  even  under  the 
adverse  conditions  of  the  supremacy  of  an  alien  tribe. 


11 

the  original  Aeolic  population.  Whence  these  Dorians  came  we 
know  not,  if  they  be  not  in  reality  the  Arneans.'  Doubtless  they 
were  Dorians  who  had  crossed  the  Pindus — such  ultramontane 
Doric  tribes  are  not  without  parallel — and,  forced  by  the  later 
incursions  of  the  Thesprotians  under  Thessalus,  pressed  south- 
ward to  seek  a  new  abode  in  Boeotia,'  Or,  perhaps,  from  the 
Dores  who,  on  their  expulsion  from  Thessaly,  settled  in  Doris,  may 
have  come  an  offshoot,  which  forced  its  way  into  Boeotia.  We 
must  be  content  with  a  non  liquet  in  the  investigation  of  such  an 
elusive  problem,  and  rest  satisfied  with  the  results  attained — that 
Boeotia  was  originally  an  Aeolic  land,  and  that  it  was  partially 
Dorized  at  an  early  period  of  its  history.  The  possibility  of 
Doric  accretions  from  the  west  at  a  later  period  is  not  thereby 
excluded,  though  an  examination  of  the  dialect  of  the  neighboring 
cantons  justifies  the  conclusion  that  the  Boeotians  were  more 
liberal  in  infusing  peculiarities  of  their  idiom  into  adjacent  regions 
than  ready  to  receive  foreign  loan-forms. 

In  Thessaly,  as  frequently  where  alien  races  come  into  contact, 
the  speech  of  the  conquerors  yielded  to  that  of  the  conquered. 
That  the  invaders  were  Dorians  is  clear  from  many  considerations, 
one  of  which  has  heretofore  been  overlooked.  The  leader  of  the 
Thesprotians  was  Thessalus,  grandson  of  Hercules  ;  the  leaders  of 
the  Dorians  who  overran  the  Achaean  Sparta  were  the  sons  of 
Aristodemus,  grandson  of  the  same  hero.  In  both  Thessaly  and 
Sparta  the  subdued  inhabitants  occupied  a  similar  position,'  the 
Achaeans  and  Magnetes  in  the  north  being  reduced  to  a  condition 
parallel  to  that  of  the  rrepioiKoi,  while  the  Trej/eVrai  were  subjected  to 
the  fate  of  the  Helots.  Thessaly  was  divided  into  four,  Laconia 
into  six  divisions.  It  need  not  excite  our  surprise  that  the  tenacity 
of  the  Aeolic  of  the  overpowered  Thessalians  was  so  vigorous  as 

'  Too  much  stress  should,  perhaps,  not  be  laid  on  kinship  between  tribes. 
It  is,  therefore,  impossible  to  show  that  the  Arneans  were  not  Dorians,  from 
the  fact  that  they  compelled  Locrians  and  the  Abantes  of  Abac  in  Phocis  to 
leave  their  homes.  That  the  Aegidae  of  Thebes  took  part  in  the  return  of  the 
Heraclidae  does  not  prove  the  original  inhabitants  of  Boeotia  to  have  been 
Dorians. 

'  Such  tribes  must  have  crossed  the  ridges  of  the  Pindus  at  a  period  ante- 
dating the  inroad  of  the  Thesprotians,  since  Achilles  calls  upon  the  Zeus  of 
the  Epirotic  Dodona  as  the  ancestral  divinity  of  his  house.  Had  these 
Epirotes,  it  may  be  remarked,  been  barbarians,  as  a  later  age  assumed,  the 
preeminent  position  of  Dodona  and  of  the  Achelous  would  be  unexplainable. 

3  'I  When  Aio//f  became  Thessaly  its  real  national  history  was  at  an  end  " — 
Curtius. 


12 

to  supplant  the  dialect  of  the  conquerors.  The  western  Greeks, 
though  of  genuine  Hellenic  stock,  were  an  uncultivated  people,  the 
Aeolians  of  Thessaly  a  people  destined,  together  with  the  Achaeans, 
to  be  the  nurse  of  the  noblest  development  of  Hellenic  poetry. 
Hence  the  fact  that  we  find  so  few  Dorisms  in  Thessaly  ;  e.^.  nori, 
Kpdros  (Lesbian  Kp(roi),  i/^-a^t^a/LieVar,  etc.,'  whereas  in  the  land  of  the 
crassi  Boeoti,  a  people  enkindled  by  no  great  love  of  the  humaner 
arts — for  Pindar  was  really  extra  fiammantia  moenia  mundi — less 
resistance  was  offered  to  the  speech  of  the  invading  Dorians. 
Thus  we  find  such  surviving  Aeolisms"  as  inf.  in  -/iej/,  patronymics 
in  -toy,  dat.  in  -luai  mixed  with  Dorisms  ;  e.g.  a  for  c  in  lapos  (Thess. 
tcpof,  Lesbic  Ipoi);  the  accus.  pi.  in  m,  "<C'?)  by  comp.  length;  airo 
for  anv,  flpfv  for  eppiv,  civ  for  op  Thess.,  Lesb. ;  kq,  the  change  of 
€0  to  to  (?),  inflection  of  de'/its  (dtpm),  roi,  rai,  absence  of  assimilation, 
reflexive  avros  nlrav,  daavTv,  fut.  in  -|a),  aorist  in  -^a  from  -fco  verbs. 
Other  non-Doric  peculiarities  of  Boeotian  speech  which  find  no 
parallel  either  in  Thessaly  or  in  Lesbos  are  either  individual 
developments  of  the  dialect  or  importations  from  elsewhere  ;  e.  g. 
TT  from  Attica  or  Euboea,  as  we  may  assume  that  the  aa-  on  the 
most  ancient  Boeotian  inscriptions  (KvTrap/o-o-ot  At/Svo-o-at)  is  antece- 
dent to  the  TT  of  the  later  monuments. 

Turning  from  the  eastern  to  the  western  portion  of  North 
Hellas,  we  enter  upon  a  field  that  has  heretofore  not  been  system- 
atically explored  by  the  dialectologist.  The  present  investigation 
of  the  vowel  and  consonantal  systems  of  the  dialect  of  Epirus, 
Acarnania,  Aetolia,  Phthiotis,  and  of  the  dialect  of  the  Aenianes, 
is  the  first  that  attempts  to  bring  together  all  the  phenomena 
illustrative  of  the  dialect  of  this  extensive  region.  Before  proceed- 
ing to  a  summary  of  the  chief  features  of  this  patois,  it  may  be 
instructive  to  pass  in  review  some  matters  of  ethnographic  and 
historical  importance  that  will  cast  light  upon  this  obscure  corner 
of  Greek  dialectology. 

Epirus.  The  Greeks  held  that  Hellas  proper  ended  at  Ambra- 
cia,  and  that  therefore  the  Epirotic  tribes  were  non- Hellenic. 
Though  Thuc.  (II    8i)  expressly  states  that  the  Chaones  were 

'  I  regard  the  use  of  kv  for  tic  as  originally  Hellenic,  and  not  confined  to  the 
Doric  of  North  Greece.  Some  portion  of  the  Dorisms  of  Thessaly  may,  of 
course,  be  held  to  be  later  accessions.  The  inscriptions  of  Pharsalia  in  Thes- 
saliotis  arc  completely  Aetolian  in  character. 

'  It  is  improbable  that  any  of  these  Aeolisms  should  have  been  importation!> 
from  Thessalv. 


13 

barbarians,  modern  investigation  has  determined  that  of  the 
northern  tribes  some  were  wholly  barbarous,  while  the  southern 
tribes  at  least  were  Hellenized.  If,  however,  the  Thesprotians 
under  Thessalus,  presumably  in  the  eleventh  century,  were  the 
source  of  the  admixture  of  Doric  elements  in  the  Aeolic  of  Thes- 
saly,  and  perhaps  of  Boeotia,  we  cannot  doubt  but  that  the 
Epiroteswere  on  a  footing  of  ethnic  equality  with  the  other  Hellenes, 
nor  refuse  to  allot  them  a  place  among  the  sections  of  that  Doric 
race  which  afterwards  was  split  into  a  northern  and  a  southern 
division.  In  history  the  Epirotes  play  no  part  till  the  rise  of  the 
Molossi  under  Pyrrhus;  and  in  i68  B.  C.  they  were  subdued  by 
the  Romans. 

Acarnofiia.  The  earliest  inhabitants  were  Leleges  and  Curetes, 
the  former  of  whom  had  originally  their  habitations  in  Caria. 
Tradition  points  to  early  settlements  under  Cypselus  from  Corinth, 
and  Blass  has  declared  that  the  Acarnanian  dialect  is  nothing  more 
than  an  imported  Corinthian,  a  declaration  which  he  has  unfortu- 
nately not  yet  proved.  The  Acarnanians  were  at  all  times  the 
bitter  opponents  of  the  Aetolians,  serving  as  auxiliaries  under 
Philip  of  Macedon  after  220,  to  which  fact  they  owed  their  fall 
in  197. 

Aetolia.  Curetes,  Leleges  and  Hyantes  are  stated  to  have  been 
the  original  settlers  of  Aetolia.  At  the  period  of  the  tribal  revo- 
lutions Aeolians  from  Thessaly  forced  their  way  in  to  settle  near 
Pleuron  and  Calydon,  and  Epirotes  came  from  the  northwest  to 
augment  the  number  of  immigrants.  The  Aetolians  were  the  earlv 
settlers  of  Elis  under  Oxylus,  though  tradition  fixed  the  original 
seat  of  the  Aetolians  in  Elis  ('HXeiai/  TrpoyonKiji/).  Thucydides, 
III  94,  makes  the  uncanny  statement  in  reference  to  the  Aetolians, 

ayvmoTaToi  Se  yXaJacraf  eiVi  Kiii  d>fMO(f)(iyoi,  o)s  Xeyovrai.  If  thlS  asser- 
tion be  true,  which  is  doubtful  on  account  of  the  qualification,  it 
can  readily  be  referred  to  the  inhabitants  of  Aetolia  eTriKTr]Tos.  The 
eastern  Greeks  evidently  had  a  fragmentary  knowledge  of  their 
western  brethren,  whom  they  characterized  as  semi- barbarians 
because  they  failed  to  keep  pace  with  themselves  in  the  race  for 
intellectual  development.  If  we  may  trust  the  evidence  of  the 
inscriptions  (cf.  especially  Coll.  1413),  which  flatly  contradicts  the 
self-asserting  superiority  of  other  more  favored  tribes,  there  did 
not  fail  to  exist,  even  in  this  western  canton,  some  love  of  sculpture 
and  of  poetry.  The  Aetolian  league  disseminated  for  almost  a 
century  its  Kayizleistyl  o\'er  a  large  part  of  Greece  and  the  Archi- 


14 

pelago  (Ceos,  Teos).  In  Laconia  (Cauer  -  30,  32)  we  find  traces 
of  Aetolian  forms  in  inscriptions  otherwise  composed  in  pure 
Laconian.  In  Phocis  (Delphi  was  subject  to  the  Aetolians  from 
290  to  191),  Locris,  South  Thessaly,  are  inscriptions  varying  in  no 
important  particular  from  those  discovered  in  Aetolia  itself.  One 
possibility  must,  however,  not  be  suppressed — the  dialect  presented 
in  the  inscriptions  may  not  be  the  native  dialect  of  the  inhabitants. 
As  the  Macedonian  official  language  is  separated  by  a  chasm  from 
the  speech  of  the  people,  which  suffered  one  of  the  earliest  recorded 
Lautverschiebiingen  on  European  soil,  so  the  judicial  language  of 
the  Aetolian  league  may  fail  to  present  to  us  those  delicate 
nuances  of  vowel  and  consonantal  coloring  which  are  the  bone 
and  sinew  of  a  genuine  "  dialect." 

The  ever-increasing  sway  which  this  Aetolian  state-speech  exer- 
cised throughout  Hellas  was  a  potent  factor  in  the  dissolution  of 
the  ancient  cantonal  idioms.  So  complete,  indeed,  appeared  the 
authority  of  this  dialect  at  the  time  of  Ahrens,  that  he  was  misled 
into  the  assertion  that  North  Doric  was  merely  an  extension  of 
Aetolian  Doric,  an  assertion  proved  to  be  false  by  the  Locrian 
tables,  and  by  the  Delphic  decrees  of  manumission.' 

The  Aenianes  were  genuine  Hellenes  and  closely  related  to  the 
Myrmidons  and  Phthiote  Achaeans.  Their  original  habitation  is 
supposed  to  have  been  Thessaly,  though  in  historical  times  they 
occupied  the  valley  of  the  Spercheios,  covering  in  part  the  territory 
embraced  by  the  ancient  Phthia.  From  279  to  195  they  were 
members  of  the  Aetolian  league. 

The  inscriptions  from  the  southernmost  Thessalian  quarter, 
Phthiotis,  bear  such  unmistakable  traces  of  North-Doric  influence 
that  the  opinion  of  Fick,  who  has  collected  and  commented  upon 
them  in  Coll.  II  1439-1473,  cannot  be  upheld,  though  supported 
by  the  authority  of  Kirchhoff  (Alphabet  ^  138),  and  Meister  (Dia- 
lecte,  I  289).  These  scholars  all  hold  that  the  inscriptions  afford  a 
true  picture  of  the  Phthiote  dialect.  The  inconsistency  of  Fick's 
opinion  is  manifest  when  we  remember  that  he  assumed  the  Doric 
dialect  of  the  invaders  from  Epirus  to  have  succumbed  to  that  of 
the  subjected  Aeolians  in  North  Thessaly.  Here,  however,  in 
Phthiotis,  where  the  pulse  of  Aeolic  life  must  have  beaten  with  the 
greatest  vigor,  where  dwelt  the  Phthiote  Achaeans,  close  to  Phthia, 
the  home  of  the  Myrmidons  and  of  Achilles,  who  was  undoubt- 

'  There  is  no  foundation  for  Giese's  statement  that  the  language  of  Aetolia 
was  Aeolic. 


15 

edly  an  Aeolian  of  the  Aeolians — here  we  are  asked  to  accept  a 
complete  submerging  of  the  Aeolic  dialect  and  its  replacement  by 
a  foreign  speech.  On  the  contrary,  I  hold  that  we  have  to  maintain 
that  the  linguistic  peculiarities  presented  by  the  inscriptions  are  the 
record  of  the  political  domination  of  the  Aetolians.  Despite  the 
complete  ascendency  of  the  official  language  of  the  Aetolians, 
traces  of  the  original  native  speech  may  have  forced  their  way 
through,  since  the  patronymic  formations  in  -to? — the  surest  crite- 
rion of  the  Aeolic  dialect — in  Nos,  1453,  1460,  1473  need  not  be 
explained  as  importations  from  any  one  of  the  three  northern 
provinces  of  the  Terpapxia.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  original 
form  of  the  dialect  of  Phthiotis,  so  far  as  our  epigraphical  testi- 
mony allows  us  to  judge,  its  present  status  is  completely  North 
Doric.  Thus,  for  example,  we  find  eeaaaXmv  No.  1444  (183  B.  C), 
and  Ka>Q)i/  No.  1459  (160  B.  C),  the  North-Thessalian  forms  being 

YlerdaXovv  and  Kdfjiovp. 

The  following  table  presents  the  chief  characteristics  of  the 
dialects  of  Epirus,  Acarnania,  Aetolia,  of  the  Aenianes  and  of 
Phthiotis  :  ' 

I.  rt  for  F  in  Lapo(jivXaK(.)v  Aetol.  hpOQ  is  also  Aetolian  and  Acarnanian.  There 
is  no  trace  of  "Apra/u^.  2.  ev-  <[  hf  in  ^ivog,  etc.  ev^Kovra  Oetaea.  3. 
'AireXlalog  Oetaea.  4.  0  in  (koKolku  Aetol. ;  cf.  OeotoMu  Plato's  Leges.  5. 
There  is  no  trace  of  i  for  e  in  Ecrta.  6.  v  in  bvvfia  Aetol.,  bvofm  in  all  the  other 
dialects  of  this  group  ;  bvo/ia  is  also  Aetolian.  7.  n,  as  in  Peloponnesian  Doric 
and  Aeolic.  Oedpog  and  Oeupog^Aetol.  TlarpoKAiag  is  a  form  declined  according 
to  the  analogy  of  the  a  decl.  8.  Hellenic  7  is  everywhere  preserved,  with 
the  exception  of  eyK-amv,  Epirus,  and  (probably)  elpdva,  found  in  all  these 
dialects.  The  ingression  of  t;  from  the  kolvt/  is  comparatively  rare.  9.  The 
genuine  diphthong  «  appears  as  e  in  Aio-iOrig  (Epirus),  Aio7TEi[lkor']  Acarn. ; 
iidv  has  the  form  ndv  (Epirus).  Uocjeiduvi  is  the  South-Thessalian  form.  10. 
Spurious  ei  and  not  spurious  //  is  the  result  of  compensatory  lengthening  of  f 
before  vg.  evf  is  reduced  to  rv.  11.  Spurious  ov  from  ovg ;  opfzzop  except 
in  Aupijuaxog  Acarn.  Aetol.  12.  -ui  is  either  (i)  preserved,  or  (2)  reduced  to 
-u  or  -01  (or  01  may  be  regarded  as  the  loc).  13.  r]i-  has  frequently  lost  the 
iota  adscriptum,  14.  Contraction  of  vowels:  ea  uncontracted  or  contracted  to 
?/ ;  ee  contracted  to  ft ;  er/  contracted  to  v  in  -/cX^ ',  £o  uncontracted  or  con- 
tracted to  ov,  EV ;  ao  uncontracted  or  contracted  to  w ;  aa  uncontracted  or 
contracted  to  a  ;  00  uncontracted  or  contracted  to  ov,  u  in  ^Apiarug;  aE  uncon- 
tracted; oE  contracted  to  ov  ;  au  contracted  to  a  ;  eu  uncontracted.  15.  f  in 
but  two  examples,  pEidvg,  farrldaQ  (both  Epirotic).-     16.  v  for  vv  (?)  in  ivtjKovra 

'  I  have  included  in  this  table  certain  Oetaean  forms  of  interest.  We  possess, 
unfortunately,  no  inscriptions  from  Doris,  the  metropolis  of  the  Laconians  and 
Messenians. 

^  Meister,  I,  p.  io6,  quotes  as  Acarn.  the  form  foivia.Sa.1.,  which  does  not  occur  in  the  in- 
scriptions. 


16 

Oetaean.  Kopvuf  =:  Tropi-uxji  Oti.  Strabo  XIII  1,64.  17.  5  for  a  once.  18. 
Declension  :  (l)  a  decl.  gen.  sing.  -"C.  -" ;  gen.  pi.  -av.  (2)  0  decl.  gen.  sing. 
-ov  ;  dat.  sing,  -ui,  -01,  -u  ;  accus.pl.  -o?,'f.  (3)  -ff  decl.  gen.  sing,  -eof,  -of  once  ; 
-Off  in  2w«/)d70T'f  Aetol.,  -eouf  in  N/vf/w/vyiar/m'f  Phth.  ;  dat.  sing,  -ei ;  accus. 
sing,  -ea,  -ti.  (4)  -tvg  decl.  gen.  -eoq  (-fwr  late);  dat.  ei,  Ati  and  At  ;  accus.  -fa, 
-}) ;  gen.  pi.  -ewv.  (5)  -i(  decl.  gen.  sing,  -tof ;  dat.  sing,  -l,  el  ;  nom.  pi.  -/ef. 
(6)  -u  decl.  gen.  -wf  and  ovg.  19.  -o<f  occurs  in  the  consonantal  decl. ;  there  is 
no  trace  of  -eaat.  20.  Pronouns :  rivoiq,  av-oaavrdv  ;  cf.  Boeot.  virep  avrb^ 
avTu.  21.  Verbals  :  -t/ti,  -ovti,  -urn;  f  in  aor.  of  -C"  verbs  ;  -eo  verbs  do  not 
generally  contract  -eo;  inf.  -eiv  for  -6)  verbs  ;  -fiev  for  //<  verbs.  22.  Preposi- 
tions: av,  ~ap,  -iTOTi,  iv  accus.  and  dat.  23.  Adverbs,  etc.:  e'l,  kq,  yh  once 
(Epir.) ;  /fa^^tif  is  very  common.' 

In  turning  from  the  rich  bloom  of  the  generous  dialect-life  in  the 
Aeolic  cantons  of  the  east  to  the  monotonous  sterility  of  the 
North  Doric  of  the  west,  we  enter  upon  a  period  of  the  devel- 
opment of  Hellenic  morphology  in  which  the  life-blood  of  the 
cantonal  speech  has  been  drained  dry,  in  which  the  epichoristic 
idiom  has  suffered  a  disintegration  which  is  equivalent  to  absorp- 
tion into  the  lingua  franca  of  Dorism.  None  of  the  western 
cantons  resisted  the  encroachment  of  the  kowt]  as  long  as  did  those 
of  Central  Greece,  or  equalled  the  tenacity  with  which  the  Laconian 
and  Messenian  dialects  maintained  their  cantonal  individuality. 

Of  greater  vitality,  and  therefore  of  greater  moment  to  the 
dialectologist,  are  those  phenomena  of  speech  contained  in  the 
interlying  dialects  of  Locris  and  Phocis  (especially  Delphi),  dialects 
which  occupy  no  unimportant  place  in  an  investigation  of  the  prob- 
lem of  Greek  dialect-mixture.  These  dialects  in  their  oldest  stage 
possess  almost  as  strong  a  local  coloring  as  the  patois  of  Boeotia. 
The  Delphic  SiaXcKroj,  while  not  so  strongly  marked  in  its  earliest 
epigraphical  monuments  as  that  of  Locris,  preserves  a  good  part 
of  its  individuality  till  the  birth  of  Christ ;  but  the  Locrian  patois 
was  soon  merged  into  that  North  Doric  which  is  spread  throughout 
all  the  regions  of  the  west. 

The  Locrian  dialect  is  represented  by  two  strata  of  phenomena : 
(i)  An  older  stratum  found  in  the  inscription  relating  to  the  settle- 
ment of  the  Opuntians  at  Naupactus  among  the  Ozolian  Locrians 

•  The  inscriptions  all  dale  from  a  late  period.  The  two  oldest  of  those  of  Epinis  may  be 
placed  between  342  and  336,  another  between  373  and  360 ;  the  rest  are  all  without  precise  date, 
though  undoubtedly  of  late  origin.  The  oldest  Acarnanian  inscription  dates  shortly  after  200, 
the  oldest  Aetolian  between  240  and  189,  while  the  majority  are  of  the  second  century.  An 
Aenianian  inscription.  No.  1429,  must  have  been  written  shortly  after  the  death  of  Alexander 
the  Great  in  323,  No.  1430  is  anterior  to  279,  others  are  of  the  second  century.  None  of  the 
Phthiotic  monuments  antedate  the  period  when  Phthiotis  was  incorporated  in  the  Aetolian 
league  (379-193);  others  belong  to  the  period  of  the  later  Thessalian  league  (193-146).  Most  of 
the  inscriptions  in  this  dialect  are  to  be  dated  before  150  B.  C. 


17 

(Coll.  1478),  datinf^  from  the  first  half  of  the  fifth  century,  and  in 
the  inscription  containing  a  fragment  of  the  treaty  between  Chal- 
eion  and  Oeanthea,  placed  by  Kirchhoff  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Peloponnesian  war  ;  (2)  All  the  later  inscriptions.  The  two  docu- 
ments of  the  first  class,  together  with  the  f-iov(rTi)n(f)r]S6v  inscription 
discovered  at  Crissa  (Cauer"  202),  and  dating  at  least  from  the 
fifth  century,  are  (aside  from  the  great  Larissaean  inscription)  the 
most  important  epigraphical  monuments  of  Northern  Greece,  and 
of  incalculable  value  to  the  dialectologist,  inasmuch  as  they  contain 
traces  of  the  oldest  phase  of  Northern  Doric  found  nowhere  else. 
The  chief  features  of  the  older  strata  of  forms  are  as  follows : 

I.  The  manifest  fondness  for  a  for  c  before  j>,  which  we  noticed  as  being  a 
cliief  peculiarity  of  the  Olympian  inscriptions  ;  ^.  ^^.  hfiapa,  pEmrdpLnq,  Tzardpn. 
2.  Contractions  :  n  -\-  t  :=z  ?/ ;  a  -j-  o  :zi  d  ;  a  -(-  6>  zz  Tt,  w  ;  £  -|-  e  rz  £/  ;  o  -j-  o  zr  w  ; 
o-\-f^o);  E -\- o,  t-[-7/do  not  suffer  contraction,  and  f -|- «  in  neut.  pi. -ff 
stems  (nom.  -»f)  is  uncon traded.  3.  The  frequency  of  the  use  of  9  ^'^fl  •^ 
(fori,  ftKaoTor).  4.  err  for  r;'/,  found  also  in  Thessaly,  Boeotia  and  Elis;  e.  j^. 
dpfnrai,  E/.fcro),  XPV^'"-'-  5-  l^t:  ]iosition  of  the  dialect  between  the  ^lU.ural 
and  the  i)aavi'Tii<.ni;  e.  ^i^''.  o,  a,  o'l,  yiLj/j ;  a}tii\  6.  o.decl.  has  gen.  sing,  in  -w, 
accus.  pi.  in  -dix  (traces  of  this  in  Delphic  are  very  problematical).  7.  ei,  ov, 
not  7j,  0)  from  compensatory  lengthening.  8.  The  flexion  of  the  -fw  verbs  as 
-fu  verbs  in  hKaAEifiEvog.  9.  ^  in  the  fut.  and  aorist  of  -s(j  verbs.  10.  Preposi- 
tions: £v  for  Eig  ;  tto,  ttu'l  ;  Trip  ;  e  zr:  tvc.  11.  Dat.  pi.  consonantal  decl.  in  -o/f ; 
e.  o".  fiEiavoiq,  XaAetioic. 

The  later  stratum  of  forms  presents  the  general  Doric  character 
of  the  western  group,  all  the  remarkable  peculiarities  of  the 
older  stratum  having  disappeared.'  Contraction  of  vowels  is  more 
frequent,  f  ceases  to  appear,  there  is  no  a  for  e  before  p.  In  this 
later  development  of  the  dialect  there  is  one  essential  difference 
between  the  dialect  of  Opuntian  and  that  of  Ozolian  Locris :  the 
former  alone  has  -eaa-i  in  the  dative  plural  of  consonantal  stems 
(xp'iiJ-itreaai,  about  200  B.  C).  This  characteristic  mark  of  the 
Aeolic  dialect  is  found  from  Mount  01y?.ipus  throughout  Boeotia, 
Opuntian  Locris  and  Delphi,  but  is  unable  to  force  its  way  across 
the  boundary  into  the  territory  of  Ozolian  Locris. 

A  survey  of  the  dialect  of  Phocis,  including  that  of  Delphi, 
which  contains  some  few  peculiarities  of  its  own,  will  complete  our 
review  of  the  speech  of  Northern  Hellas.  The  oldest  monuments 
of  the  Phocian  dialect  are  inscription  No.  1537  (Crissa),  which 
Kirchhoff  assigns  to  the  sixth  century  as  the  earliest  possible  date, 

'  The  inscriptions  of  the  Ozolian  Locris  contain  the  same  dialectic  features 
as  those  of  Opuntian  or  Hypocnemedian  Locris. 


18 

and  No.  1531  (Elatea),  which  must  be  of  considerable  anticjuity, 
as  it  has  the  labial  spirant  in  FavaKtian.  Of  the  Delphic  dialect  the 
oldest  monuments  are  Cauer'''  203,  which  contains  the  form  Fi^, 
and  No.  204.  380  B.  C.  As  the  manumission  decrees  of  Delphi 
present  more  peculiarities  than  the  inscriptions  of  the  rest  of  Phocis, 
I  give  here  a  summary  of  the  dialect  of  the  former,  noticing  when 
the  Phocian  monuments  register  actual  differences : 

I.  a  in  Kfj ;  there  are  but  few  cases  of  ar,  these  occurring  after  the  birih  of  Christ, 
u'l  in  the  oracle  licit.  IV  157  and  C-  204  ;  all  later  inscriptions  have  n'l.  la/joc 
and  u7)of  in  the  oldest  Uelphic  inscription.  ^ Aprafiirug,  (U<iiia7ioi.  2.  f.  adj. 
termination  in  -coc,  which  is  contracted  about  200.  ^ A-i:?.?.aiog ;  cf.  Loc. 
'AttuaAo)!'  ;  e  for  o  is  Delphic  alone  in  i/lihur/Kovra,  ofJsAo;  (also  Mes^arian), 
Trf/lfr/wr.  -fw  for -rtw  in  av/Ju,  ETTiTi/jeu).  3.  o;  riTo/if^  to  the  third  century 
B.  C.  Tfoi  in  ni>iTf>6~in^.  4.  v;  orvfia,  evih'c.  5.  </ ;  «f,  tlioujjh  fwf  is  more  com- 
mon; ffeafm- and  Oe<jf)o- ;  kvKTaai^.  6.  7/,  from  f -}- // ;  \n  'LuaiK()arij(i,lepi/La,c\.c. 
7.  10;  ai'c  wT-fif,  -erpuKovrn.  8.  Contractions:  f-\-ez:r.£i\  a-{-nz^ur)  and  a 
((if);  (I -\- ri  zz.  ari ;  e -]- a  zz.  ea  o^nd  v  in  neut.  pi.  of  -of  nouns  (except  frfa); 
e  -\-  Tjz=.ri  (one  example  of  eri) ;  a  -j-  w  zir  n ,  w  ;  e  -}-  o  n:  fo,  later  ti\  i>v  ;  t  -\-  lo 
:=  f<J,  later  w ;  n  -\-  oznj  (in  nouns  in  -w)  and  ov.  g.  Spiritus  asper  in  eoiopKEiv, 
{(paKEioOu,  iiho^  Delphic  alone.  10.  Spurious  si  and  ov  from  comp.  length.  II. 
Consonants:  6<5e/of,  (hihifiai  ;  tt  for  r  in  Tlr/Mii/.ta^ ;  t/iHov.  12.  Declen- 
sion :  gen.  sing,  -uv,  accus.  pi.  -ovr  (ihe  forms  in  o  and  of,  in  C-  204  are 
doubtless  mere  inaccuracies) ;  dat.  in  -01  (about  30  cases)  ;  -o(f  and  -taoL 
in  conson.  decl.  in  Delphic.  I  find  no  case  of  -ecrai  in  the  rest  of  Phocis ; 
-T/v  Stems  have  gen.  -eog.  13.  Conjugation:  verbs  in  -uu,  -t/u;  -^u  and  -^a 
from  -C(J  verbs  {-aiu  fut.  is  a  peculiarity  of  the  older  Delphic) ;  -fw  verbs  con- 
jugated according  to  -fxi  inflection.  Optative  in  -oav,  -t)it>,  -oiaav.  Imperative 
-VTuv  in  the  oldest  inscr.,  later  -vru  and  -nav.  Intin.  in  -fv,  (pipev,  h'oiKiv  D., 
Phocis  -Eiv  or  -//v  (av?if/v,  i-iTiitf/v  D.),  elut:i\  a-o(^ou£i\  Participle :  /lac'riytjuv 
avAr/ovreg,  ■Kmeijievog,  jp£//^ci'Of.  14.  Prep.,  etc.:  ^a,  ~f/>  in  7rf/)0(5of,  ~oi,  kv 
cum  accus.;  el,  olt;  "  whither  "  D. ;  Elision  is  more  frequent  in  D.  than  in  Locrian. 

This  presentation  of  the  phenomena  of  North-Greek  speech, 
which  affords  a  complete  summary  of  the  prominent  features  of 
each  dialect,  has  now  placed  us  in  a  position  to  gain  a  wider 
horizon  in  our  estimate  of  the  interrelation  of  the  various  dialects 
of  this  e.xtensive  territory.  The  entire  region  north  of  the  Pelo- 
ponnesus, with  the  exception  of  Attica  and  Megara,  was  the  seat 
of  two  great  dialects  :  (i)  the  Aeolic  in  the  east,  foimd  originally 
in  Tliessaly  and  in  Boeotia,  where,  through  tribal  revolutions 
and  later  dialect  mixture,  it  has  become  strongly  interfused  with 
Dorisms,  and  (2)  the  North  Doric,  found  in  comparative  purity,  il 
we  consider  the  paucity  and  late  date  of  the  inscriptions,  in 
Western  Greece,  /.  e.  from  the  eastern  confines  of  Aetolia  to  the 
west  and   northwest.     This  dialect  contains    no   Aeolisms   what- 


19 

ever.  Between  the  two — the  Aeolic  of  the  east  and  the  North 
Doric  of  the  west— lies  the  Doric  of  the  centre,  a  Doric  essen- 
tially of  the  same  character  as  that  of  the  west,  though  from  its 
greater  antiquity  presenting  peculiarities  not  found  elsewhere.  The 
Doric  of  the  west  and  the  Doric  of  the  centre  of  North  Greece 
presents  so  many  characteristic  features  which  are  identical,  that  it 
can  hardly  be  deemed  an  assertion  devoid  of  improbability  if  we 
maintain  that  no  small  portion  of  the  Doric  peculiarities  of  the 
Locrian  idiom  must  have  been  a  common  heritage  of  the  Dorians 
who  remained  in  North  Greece,  and  that,  if  we  possessed  epigraphic 
testimony  from  Aetolia  or  Epirus  of  the  sixth  or  fifth  centuries,  or 
even  such  of  a  later  date  but  of  an  unofficial  type,  we  should 
discover  manv  of  those  phenomena  which  are  now  held  to  be  the 
distinctive  property  of  Locris  or  Phocis ;  e.  g.  the  Locrian  geni- 
tives in  -o). 

The  peculiar  nature  of  the  North  Dorisms,  mixed  with  Aeolisms, 
in  the  Elean  dialect  substantiates  the  above  hypothesis ;  for,  had 
the  Aetolians,  at  the  time  of  their  emigration  to  Elis,  used  as  a 
vehicle  of  expression  no  other  form  of  the  dialect  than  that  found 
in  the  inscriptions  of  their  canton,  those  distinctive  North-Greek 
features  of  Elean  could  never  have  been  introduced  by  their  agency. 
We  may,  indeed,  conjecture  that  the  official  language  ol  the  in- 
scriptions—a language  reduced  to  the  dead  level  of  a  monotonous 
Dorism— does  not  represent  the  language  of  the  people,  but  such 
a  conjecture  does  not  militate  against  the  probability  of  the 
assumption  that  originally  there  was  but  one  North  Doric,  varied 
no  doubt  here  and  there  by  cantonal  preferences,  but  spoken  by 
Locrians  and  Aetolians  alike.  By  this  assumption  alone  can  the 
Doric  ingredient  in  the  mixture  of  dialects  in  Elis  be  explained. 

There  now  remains  but  one  problem  for  our  consideration— the 
interrelation  of  the  North-Doric  and  Aeolic  elements  in  the  speech 
of  Locris  and  Phocis.  There  are  thr  e  possible  solutions  to  this 
difficult  question:  (i)  The  Aeolisms  embedded  in  the  Doric  of 
Phocis  and  Locris  are  loan-formations  from  the  Aeolic  of  the  east 
or  northeast,  or  (2)  they  are  the  result  of  independent  generation, 
or  (3)  they  are  relics  of  an  Aeolo-Doric  period.  To  the  impossi- 
bility of  demonstrating  the  existence  of  such  a  period,  and  of  the 
inadvisability  of  attributing  to  it,  if  demonstrated,  any  potency 
in  the  settlement  of  mooted  questions,  reference  has  already 
been  made.  If,  at  the  time  of  Homer,  or  of  the  return  of  the 
Heraclidae,  Aeolic    and    Doric  were  cleft  asunder,  to  what  re- 


20 

moter  period  sliall  we  then  penetrate  to  discover  a  unity  which 
shall  throw  a  flood  of  lii^ht  upon  the  existence  of  sporadic 
phenomena  at  variance  with  the  genius  ot  the  dialect  in  whicli  they 
appear — phenomena  that  belong;  to  a  period  at  least  a  thousand 
years  after  this  supposed  Aeolo-Doric  unity?  Perhaps  no  argu- 
ment could  be  better  adapted  to  strengthen  Schmidt's  "  wave- 
theory  "  than  the  indefensibility  of  such  assumptions  as  those  of 
Merzdorf  and  others.'  Shall  the  dialectologist.  supported  solely 
by  the  elusive  testimonv  at  his  command,  arrogate  to  himself  the 
right  to  establish  periods  in  the  prehistoric  life  of  Hellas,  from 
which  even  the  historian  or  ethnographer  recoils  ?  If  I  read  aright 
the  march  of  Greek  dialectological  investigation,  one  tendency  at 
least  is  apparent :  the  assumption  of  an  original  unity  of  tribes, 
that  later  on  enjoyed  a  separate  existence,  is  only  then  available 
as  a  sure  basis  for  further  speculation  when  such  a  unity  is 
elevated  beyond  the  possibility  of  a  doubt. 

When  a  causa  cfficiens  for  dialect  mixture^  can  be  found  in 
tribal  migrations  attested  by  the  evidence  of  antiquity,  such 
evidence  cannot  be  neglected.  But  the  assumption  of  dialect 
mixture,  even  when  we  can  show  no  historical  testimony  to  the 
special  influence  of  one  tribe  upon  another,  or  the  assumption  of 
independent  generation,  is  invariably  preferable  to  any  theory  of 
great  tribal  unities  designed  to  solve  all  difficulties  as  a  dens  ex 
rnachina.  By  the  ''  independent  generation  "  of  a  form  in  a  Greek 
dialect,  I  understand  the  genesis  of  a  form  which  is  alien  to  the 
genius  of  the  dialect  in  which  it  appears,  and  which  is  controlled 
in  the  last  instance  by  the  forces  of  analogy.  As  language  con- 
stantly renews  her  processes,  it  is  possible  that  the  same  tendency 
to  create  a  given  form  may  arise  independently  in  different  locali- 
ties which  stand  in  no  interrelation.  Such  an  analogical  iorma- 
tion  may  have  arisen,  for  example,  in  the  dialect  of  Locris  many 
years  after  a  similar  form  "^  ion  was  called  into  existence  in  the 
dialect  of  Lesbos,  and  at  a  time  when  the  forces  that  caused  the 
Lesbian  formation  had  become  impotent  in  Lesbos. 

I  assert,  then,  in  opposition  t-T  each  and  every  scholar  who  is  of 
the  opinion  that  the  Aeolisms  of  Locris  and  Fhocis  are  survivals  of 
an  Aeolo-Doric  unity,  that  neither  is  the  testimony  of  antiquity  '  nor 

'  Prof.  Allen  no  longer  accepts  the  views  adopted  by  l)im  in  Curt.  Stud.  Ill, 
1870. 

*  The  Gortynian  inscription  offers  some  reinarkable  instances  of  dialect 
mixture  ;  e.  1^  ilie  Aeolic  *<;,  'tin,  vtfid,  okvi,  t/I/i'/. 

'Straho   rcj^arded    the    Doric  as  a   part  of  the  .'\coIic  dialect  (7//I' (U-  Supit^a 


21 

is  the  evidence  of  Greek  dialectology  able  to  establish  as  valid 
any  such  unity  ;  on  the  contrary,  I  maintain  that  all  these  Aeolisms 
are  either  loan-formations  or  are  the  result  of  independent  genera- 
tion. The  delimitation  of  the  extent  of  dialect  mixture  is  as 
difficult  as  the  delimitation  of  that  of  independent  generation  ;  and 
that  it  is  olten  difficult  to  determine  whether  we  shall  assign  a 
given  form  to  one  or  to  the  other  of  these  causes,  cannot  be  held 
to  militate  against  the  validity  of  my  position. 

Connection  between  Boeotia  and  Phocis  or  Locris  is  co  ipso 
probable,  and  is  attested  in  many  ways  ;'  'Ep;^o/net/o$-  in  a  Delphic 
inscription  preserves  the  epichoristic  spelling  of  the  later  '0/,;^oyufrof. 
Hartmann  attributes  to  the  Boeotian  dialect  a  vigorous  influence 
in  coloring  the  Doric  of  the  west,  but  as  he  fails  to  support  his 
assertions  by  any  arguments  that  savor  of  cogency,  we  are  not 
loath  to  characterize  as  incredible  his  statement  that  the  datives  in 
-01  in  Delphic  are  a  loan-formation,  since  there  are  about  30  instances 
of  -01,  over  1000  in  -wi.  It  h;is  been  assivried  that  the  -ot's  repre- 
sent an  orthographical  error,  an  assertion  as  far  from  the  truth 
as  that  they  are  Boeotisms.  Traces  of  Boeotian  influence  have 
been  seen  in  Apu^ui's  and  in  eVSi-?,  for  ApofjLuvs  (cf.  ApnfxeCs,  Apo/^m?) 
and  eVSor,  which  is  ascribed  to  the  Dorians,  Anecd.  Ox.  II  162,  10. 
But,  though  the  darkening  of  o  to  v  is  found  in  Boeotian  (Aiov<t- 
Kovpi8ao,  Qi-^vTinv  and  in  AiuSorco  Nu'/ieiVeo?),  this  phenomenon  is  not 
exclusively  Boeotian,  as  it  is  not  even  chiefly  Aeolic.  As  eu8os 
occurs  in  Delphic,  the  v  of  e^Si;?  may  have  been  generated  on 
Delphian  soil ;  and  Apvfinla,  Apv^ia,  Apv/jios  are  different  names  of  a 
city  of  Phocis.  Apvpuls  need,  therefore,  not  contain  the  base  8pofi. 
Urj\(KXea,  W.  F.  54,  2,  is  perhaps  a  Boeotism  for  TtjXeKXia  ;  cf  Boeot. 

UeiXeTTpoTiSas  (but  alsO  Tei\ecj)i'iv(ios)  and  Lesbic  miXvL  =:  TrjXno-e. 

Locnan  fVKaXflp.(vof,  Del[)hic  Trote/pei/o?,  acfiaipeifievos  are  instances 
of  the  -fxi  inflection  of  -ew  verbs  that  con''tintly  recurs  in  the  dialects 
of  Aeolic  coloring.-  It  is  improbabpl'  that  tPKaXd/xepos  should, 
through  Boeotian  influence,  have  forced  its  way  into  the  dialect  of 
the  Ozolian  from  that  of  the  Opuntlan  Locrians,  who  were  settlers 
in  Naupactus.  The  -pi  form  is  to  be  ascribed  either  to  the  influ- 
ence of  Aeolic  settlers  (cf.  Terpander  and  the  Lesbic  citharoedi, 

rri  Ma/A(h).  In  another  passage  Strabo  calls  the  Aeolians  and  Dorians 
ofioyevel^. 

'  Connection  with  Thessaly  was,  perhaps,  not  so  intimate.  The  sacred 
processions  to  Olympus  may,  however,  be  adduced. 

-  Hom.  (lAiTrjuevoi:,  old  Lesbic  Tvoif/usmg,  later  Lesbic  -oeifiEvng,  Boeot.  (pi/.eiui 
(gramm.),  Thcss.  yvfii-asiapxii'rog,  Arcad.  ddiKyjusvoc,  Elean  Ka6a/.iju£voq. 


22 

Ahrens,  Gott.  Phil.  Versamml.,  1852,  p.  77),  or,  better,  to  a  devel- 
opment of  the  Doric  of  these  cantons  parallel  to  that  of  the 
Aeolic  dialect.  As  these  forms  are  undoubtedly  of  later  origin, 
they  offer  no  proof  of  an  Aeolo-Doric  period. 

(V  cum  accusaiivo  occurs  throuii^hout  the  entire  extent  of 
Northern  Hellas  («ty  occurs  in  all  the  Delphic  inscriptions  but 
three  times),  and  in  Arcado-Cyprian.  It  does  not  occur,  however, 
in  the  Kar  (^oxi,v  Aeolic  dialect,  the  Lesbian.  As  this  construction 
is  a  relic  of  the  period  when  Greeks  and  Latins '  possessed 
but  one  preposition  to  express  "motion  to"  and  "rest  in,"  it 
cannot  be  regarded  as  a  characteristic  of  an  Aeolo-Doric  age. 
The  lonians  have  supplanted  it  entirely  by  the  use  of  «,  (U,  and 
the  Aeolians  too,  perhaps  under  the  influence  of  their  Ionic 
neighbors,  relinquished  their  ancient  inheritance.  That  ty  C7cm 
gcnctivo  in  Aeolic  was  driven  out  by  U,  e^  of  the  lonians  is  not 
improbable,  as  both  Thessalian  and  Boeotian  stand  here  on  a 
plane.  The  occurrence  of  ^V  in  «X  \aKi8(unova  (C*  26,  8,  about  3:6 
B.  C),  the  single  example  in  Laconian  inscri])tions,  is,  if  correct, 
a  trace  of  Elean  influence,  rather  than  a  survival  of  the  original 
construction. 

The  elision  of  nepl  is  not  Aeolo-Doric,  but  Hellenic,  though  of 
sporadic  occurrence.  For  Attic  the  forms  7rep«/ii.iXo^To,  Agam.  1147  ; 
TTf/jco-Kiyj'coo-fi',  Eum.  634 ;  Tre/jiwj/,  in  a  fragment  of  a  comic  poet,  are 
well  attested.  The  elision  of  this  preposition,  claimed  as  a 
characteristic  of  the  Locrian  idiom,  is  done  away  with  by  the 
correct  reading,  n^pKodaindv,  Coll.  1478.  Tre'poSoj,  the  single  occur- 
rence on  Delphian  territory,"  nepiSaios,  nfiHinrMV,  nep'  avras,  nep' 
arXtiTov  nddas  in  Pindar,  irepolxfrai,  irtpiaxf  in  Hesiod,  poets,  who 
have  incorrectly  been  supposed  to  have  preserved  herein  traces  of 
their  close  relationship  ti*  the  Pythian  oracle  at  Delphi,  wfpnpvvvni, 
irtpnaxia,  rrfpoifnov  in  Hes^ra  ius,  the  Elean  mip,  which  may  be  due 
to  North-Doric  or  to  Ac'e  .c  influence  (cf  Alcaeus  36,  ufpOtTU)  ;  and 
in  two  conjectures  of  Bergk  ttf/)'),  «•?/>'  tpflo  Megara  CIG  I,  1064 — 
all  these  forms  make  clear  the  folly  of  attaching  to  a  single  dialect 
an  occurrence  of  such  general  character.'' 

The  dative  pi.  in  -on  in  the  cons.  decl.  is  found  in  Aetolian, 
Locrian  and   Delphic,  and  also  in   Boeotian  (nyvi),   the   isolated 

'  Cf.  old  Irish  i{n),  Germ,  in,  old  Pruss.  e/t,  Lilli.  in,  /. 

^  Kepiuiev  is  also  Delphic,  C*  204,  18 — the  same  inscription  in  which 
Tripodog  occurs,  nip  is  also  Thessalian,  in  wiiicii  dialect  the  full  form  does  not 
exist. 

*Cf.  a/if  in  Homer,  a/KJii  in  Attic. 


23 

position  of  which  leads  us  to  regard  it  as  an  importation  from  the 
west,  though  the  possibility  of  its  being  a  native  growth  should 
not  be  suppressed.  This  analogical  formation,  like  that  of  -(T(w  in 
the  imperfect,  testifies  merely  to  the  loosening  of  the  old  rigidity 
of  inflection,  and  is  not  the  exclusive  property  of  any  dialect,  since 
it  appears  in  Messenian,  late  Laconian,  Sicilian,  Arcadian,  Cretan, 
and  perhaps  in  Lesbian. 

That  -faai  is  not  Aeolo-Doric  is  clear  from  the  fact  that,  apart 
from  the  Homeric  and  Lesbian  formations,  it  occurs  only  in 
Boeotian  and  in  Thessalian.  There  is  no  trace  whatsoever  of 
-f(T(Ti  in  any  inscription  of  Peloponnesian  Doric,  and  in  North 
Greece  it  comes  to  light  only  as  far  west  as  the  western  boundary 
of  Phocis.  If  this  form  were  Aeolo  Doric,  its  appearance  be>  ond 
this  boundary  and  elsewhere  would  have  followed  as  a  consequence. 
The  Delphic  forms  are  not  necessarily  loan-formations,  as  they 
may  be  representatives  of  the  forces  of  an.-'ogy  inherent  in  each 
separate  dialect,  -eam  occurs  in  inscription^  of  Corcyra,  Megara, 
in  Theocritus  and  in  Archimedes. 

The  result  of  this  investigation  may  now  be  briefly  stated : 
L  The  eastern  part  of  North  Greece  was  originally  the  abode 
of  an  Aeolic  race  whose  dialect  survived  in  Thessaly  till  the  latest 
times.  In  Boeotia  the  incursion  of  a  foreign  Doric  element  was 
not  so  successfully  resisted  as  in  the  case  of  Thessaly,  and  it  is  to 
the  influence  of  this  foreign  element  that  we  owe,  both  in  Thessaly 
and  Boeotia,  the  existence  of  Doric  forms,  though  thereby  the 
possibility  of  later  accessions  is  not  denied. 

II.  The  dialect  of  the  extreme  western  part  of  North  Greece 
is  pure  North  Doric,  and  absolutely  free  from  the  contamination  of 
Aeolisms. 

III.  The  dialects  of  Central  North  Greece  are  substantially 
North  Doric  in  character  ;  the  Aeolisms  whch  they  contain  are  not 
survivals  of  an  Aeolo-Doric  period,  but  aie  purely  adventitious, 
and  their  appearance  is  traceable  up  to  certain  definite  limits. 

IV.  Conformity  to  general  usage,  and  not  an  accurate  termino- 
logy, dictates  my  expression  "  dialect  of  Epirus,"  etc.,  though  care 
must  be  taken  to  assert  that,  in  the  five  cantons,  Epirus,  Acarnania, 
Aetolia,  the  canton  of  the  Aenianes  and  Phthiotis,  there  obtained 
at  the  period  subject  to  our  control  but  one  "  dialect,"  distinguished 
here  and  there  by  minute  local  landmarks.  I  see  herein  a  proof 
of  the  correctness  of  the  theory  of  Joh.  Schmidt  (or  of  Paul 
Meyer,  if  he  has  the  prior  claim  of  being  its  originator),  in  so  far 


24 

as  it  maintains  that  the  term  "dialect"  refuses  to  be  restricted  to 
any  limited  centre  of  si)ccch.  In  any  theory  of  dialects  which 
are  ever  subject  to  a  Heraclitean  flux,  especially  if  not  subjected 
to  the  restraining  hand  of  a  written  literature,  chronological  con- 
siderations are  of  an  importance  that  cannot  be  underestimated. 
Therefore,  while  for  a  later  period  of  the  dialect-life  of  Hellas  the 
expression  "dialect"  is  one  of  peculiar  rclativeness,  it  is  a  justifi- 
able term  for  certain  aggregations  of  morphological  and  syntactical 
phenomena  in  the  earlier  periods  of  language,  when  dialect-relations 
were  more  sharply  dehned.  Schmidt's  theory  is  undoubtedly 
popular,  though  it  has  suffered  trenchant  criticism,  notably  at  the 
hands  of  Fick,  but  I  doubt  whether  it  can  ultimately  hold  ground. 
If  it  were  rigorously  enforced,  it  might  deprive  of  all  individual 
existence  so  strongly  colored  an  idiom  as  that  of  Boeotia  or  Thes- 
saly,  Locris  or  Delphi.  The  restriction  of  the  term  "dialect  "  to 
narrow  geographic.^',  limits  may  convey,  and  has  conveyed, 
erroneous  conceptioi.^'  concerning  the  nature  of  a  dialect,  but  the 
boundaries  which  enclose  a  dialect  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word 
are  not  necessarily  coextensive  with  those  dictated  by  geographical 
configuration  or  by  the  exigencies  of  state  policy. 

This  investigation,  then,  is  not  without  its  significance,  inasmucli 
as  it  casts  a  light — dimmed,  it  is  true,  by  the  poverty  of  material 
at  our  command — upon  the  contention  between  two  theories  of  the 
interpretation  of  dialectical  phenomena.  It  shows  us  that  we 
cannot  cast  aside  the  Sianunbauinsihcorie  engrafted  upon  Greek 
by  the  Darwinism  of  Schleicher,  and  still  defended  by  Ulrich  von 
Wilamowitz-Mollendorf,  even  though  the  practical  difficulties  in 
the  way  of  its  absolute  adoption  seem  well-nigh  insurmountable. 
If,  too  timid,  we  struggle  to  avoid  being  dashed  against  the  Scylla 
of  Schleicherism,  we  may  be  drawn  into  the  Charybdean  waves  of 
Schmidt's  Wellenthcirie.  The  cardinal  feature  of  this  consists, 
according  to  one  of  its  n'.ost  keen-sighted  adherents,'  in  its  assump- 
tion :  "  Dass  sie  (Schmidt's  Theorie)  cine  allniahliche  Dijfercn- 
zicruiii^  des  urspr'un^Uch  in  (ontinuieylichcr  Reihe  verlaufenden 
Sprachgcbielcs  anninwil  unci  cicar  cine  Dijfcfcnzierjaii^  dnrch 
diakklische  N£iierunf;^cn,die  an  verschicdcncn  S/e/lcn  des  iirspi  i'tm;- 
lichen  Gcbietes  aufkommen  tind  von  dcm  Punktc  Hirer  Ent^tchun^ 
aus  an/  das  bcnachbarie  Gcbict  sick  vcrbreiicn."  The  adoption 
of  such  an  exi^lanation  not  only  of  the  I.-E.  languages,  but  also  of 
the  Greek  dialects,  may  lead  us  to  see  the  cause  whereby  sub-dialect 

'  Colliu  ill  Vcrwancltschaftsvcilialtnissc  dcr  griccliisclicii  Di.ilckto,  1SS5. 


25 

may  lead  to  sub-dialect,  and  how  each  dialect  may  thus  be  bound 
together  with  the  life  of  another  by  a  "continuous  series  of  minute 
variations."  But  we  are  confronted  in  the  science  of  Greek  dialec- 
tology with  phenomena  dating  from  historical  periods  ;  for  these 
phenomena  we  must  seek  a  historical  explanation  as  far  as  is  per- 
mitted by  the  dim  light  of  history.  The  wave-theory  regards  as 
merely  interesting  confirmations  of  its  suppositions  those  causes 
of  differentiation  of  a  linguistic  territory  which  to  its  opponents 
are  the  very  sinew  of  the  genealogical  theory.  It  may  well  be 
questioned  whether  Schmidt's  theory  does  not  confuse  those  pro- 
cesses which  caused  dialects  originally  to  come  into  existence,  and 
those  processes  which  give  birth  to  phenomena  that  have  become 
in  historical  times  the  property  of  two  adjacent  dialects  which  have 
flourished  for  a  long  period  of  time.  Peculiarities  which  link 
together  two  dialects  may  be  ascribed  to  the  influence  of  one 
upon  the  other  ;  but  in  periods  antedatin.  all  historical  ken  the 
influence  of  a  neighboring  speech-territory  -".eed  not  necessarily 
have  been  the  cause  of  dialectic  peculiarities.     ;  ■__ 

If  linguistic  phenomena  alone  be  taken  as  the  point  of  departure, 
we  must  confess  that  we  thereby  seek  a  refuge  in  a  sauve  qui peut, 
and  renounce  that  ideal  whose  every  patient  endeavor  aims  at 
discovering  in  the  disieda  membra  of  dialect-speech  a  clue  that 
will  reinforce  those  utterances  of  antiquity  which  make  for  the 
intimate  connection  between  parent-stock  and  the  offspring  which, 
in  periods  subject  to  conjecture  alone,  left  an  ancestral  home.  This 
ideal  in  dialectology  is  as  important  a  guiding  motive  as  the  ideal 
of  the  freedom  from  exception  to  phonetic  law  is  in  the  science  of 
comparative  philology.  We  have,  then,  at  least  no  mean  purpose, 
if  we  search  for  the  golden  thread  that  shall  lead  us  to  an  expla- 
nation of  the  genealogy  of  each  separate  tbrm.  With  this  ideal  in 
view  we  may  perhaps  discover  that,  when  the  forms  of  adventitious 
growth  have  been  separated  from  those  wi  ich  are  indigenous,  it  is 
not  impossible  to  construct  genealogical  trees  for  the  Greek  dialects, 
which  will  stand  in  harmonious  interdependence.  If  we  endeavor 
to  sift  the  material  which  a  kind  chance  has  preserved  to  us,  and 
believe  that  terra  mater  noua  miracula  suis  ex  uisceribus  num- 
quam  emittere  cessabit,  we  may  trust  that  a  solution  may  not  be 
far  off"  for  many  problems  which  the  vigorous  dialect-life  of  Hellas 
presents. 

Herbert  Weir  Smyth. 


i 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  50  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


^^B-Q 


no 


23Jnn^59Mff 


IVi--*^ 


yz:^ 


JAN  Ifi  1959 


subject  to  recall  after- 


^ 


vo 


^■ 


OCJ ., 


mm  ^i  78 


MAY  1 4  1977  # 


Ju~j'^(,  ('?■^-:^ 


t-i/ff^ 


l-i^ii/m 


A-c/.Vy^k»j- 


ili8>!'»     • 


rt 


^ 


^ 


*^ 


(t£C  CIR.OCT  ?0  77 


LD  21-100;H-7,':ti)(402s) 


U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CD^7D^S3^7 


